Plant pathogen inhibitor combinations and methods of use

ABSTRACT

Combinations, compositions and methods of use for modulating plant pathogen infection using plant extracts containing anthraquinone derivatives which induce resistance to plant phytopathogens and an antimicrobial agent, a biological control agent and/or a surfactant having fungicidal activity.

TECHNICAL FIELD

Disclosed herein are combinations, compositions and methods of use for modulating plant pathogen infection using plant extracts containing anthraquinone derivatives which induce resistance to plant phytopathogens and an antimicrobial agent, a biological control agent and/or a surfactant having fungicidal activity.

BACKGROUND

Plant Resistance to Plant Pathogens

Plants have evolved highly effective mechanisms for resistance to disease caused by infectious agents, such as bacteria, fungi and viruses. This resistance can be caused by several mechanisms, the best known of which are the systemic acquired resistance (SAR; Ross, 1961; Durrant and Dong, 2004) and induced systemic resistance (ISR; van Loon et al., 1998). In the most simple case, the inducer is the plant pathogen itself, in other cases, the inducer can be either a chemical compound (salicylic acid, benzo(1,2,3)thiadiazole-7-carbothioic acid S-methyl ester also known as BTH) or physical impact such as water or heat stress (Walters et al., 2005). It appears that induced systemic resistance depends upon a gradual expression and persistence of a low level of metabolic perturbation. Unlike elicitors of phytoalexin accumulation, which elicit at the site of application and may be responsible for localized protection, inducers of systemic resistance sensitize the plant as a whole to respond rapidly after infections. These responses include phytoalexin accumulation, lignification and enhanced activities of chitinase and glucanase.

Extract from giant knotweed (Reynoutria sachalinensis) sold as MILSANA® and REGALIA® by Marrone Bio Innovations, Inc.) provides control of powdery mildew and other plant diseases on cucurbits and other crops mainly by inducing an accumulation of fungitoxic phenolic compounds in the plant (Daayf et al., 1995; Wurms et al. 1999; Schmitt, 2002). Recently, formulated giant knotweed extract has also shown great efficiency in inducing resistance in various crops and plant pathogens including wheat powdery mildew (Vechet et al., 2009). Besides the ISR mode of action, the formulated R. sachalinensis extract has recently also been shown to have a direct fungistatic effect against wheat powdery mildew (Blumeria graminis f. sp. tritici; Randoux et al., 2008).

Fungicide Resistance

Fungicide resistance is a common phenomenon in pests including plant pathogens. When a fungicide, especially those with single-site mode of action, is frequently used, the targeted pathogen can adapt to the fungicide due to high selection pressure. It is estimated that pests can develop resistance to pesticides within 5-50 generations (May, 1985). Most plant pathogens fit in this range in one growth season and thus can develop fungicide resistance quickly. For example, it only took one year for benomyl lost efficacy for control of cucurbit powdery mildew after its first registration for commercial use (McGrath, 2001).

Quinone outside inhibitors (also known as QoI fungicides or strobilurins) has been widely used to control agriculturally important fungal pathogens since their introduction in 1996. Strobilurins block the respiration pathway by inhibiting the cytochrome bc1 complex in mitochondria, thereby blocking the electron transfer process in the respiration chain and causing an energy deficiency due to lack of adenosine triphosphate (ATP) (Bartlett et al., 2002). Strobilurins and other fungicides with a single-site mode of action such as demethylation inhibitors (DMI) are prone to resistance development among plant pathogens. To date, several plant pathogenic fungi have developed field resistance to strobilurins (Tuttle McGrath, 2003; Fraaije et al., 2003) and DMI fungicides (Schnabel et al., 2004), and considerable effort has been made worldwide to develop appropriate resistance management strategies with detailed recommendations of how to combine fungicides and other antifungal compounds in programs and rotations to minimize the risk of resistance development (Tuttle McGrath, 2006; Wyenandt et al., 2009).

Methods to Control Fungicide Resistance

The most common strategy to manage fungicide resistance is to use site-specific fungicides that are prone to resistance development in a combination (pre-mix or tank mix). Besides resistance management, tank mixes also offer a compensatory mechanism in case of a failure of one fungicide as well as a way to reduce the dose to reduce selection pressure on pathogens (van den Bosch and Gilligan, 2008). In some cases, the combination of single and multisite fungicides in a tank mix or in rotation can provide additive or even synergistic interactions (Gisi, 1996). Holb and Schnabel (2008) were able to show improved control of brown rot (Monilinia fructicola) in a field study with a tank mix of a DMI fungicide and elemental sulfur, and Reuveni (2001) demonstrated the benefits of using strobilurins and polyoxin B fungicides in combination with sulfur to control powdery mildew in nectarines.

Plant defense inducers such as the extract of R. sachalinensis have been tested in tank mixes and rotations with other SAR/ISR products as well as with biocontrol agents (BCA) (Hafez et al., 1999; Belanger and Benyagoub, 1997; Schmitt et al., 2002; Schmitt and Seddon, 2005; Bardin et al., 2008). The purpose of these studies has mainly been to demonstrate the compatibility of different types of plant extracts with biocontrol agents. Konstatinidou-Doltsinis et al. (2007) tested the R. sachalinensis product in a rotation with Pseudozyma flocculosa product against powdery mildew on grapes, and found that alternated application of both products improved the efficacy of R. sachalinensis. In the same study, alternation of sulfur and R. sachalinensis in a rotation did not have a beneficial effect. Belanger and Benyagoub (1997) found that a yeast-like fungus, Pseudozyma flocculosa, was compatible with R. sachalinensis when used against cucumber powdery mildew in a greenhouse. Similarly, Bokshi et al. (2008) evaluated the combined effect of an acquired systemic resistance activator benzothiadiazole and MILSANA® against cucumber powdery mildew, and found that MILSANA® used in a rotation with benzothiadiazole provided an effective control measure against powdery mildew in the field. However, based on the disease severity and yield data collected, it was not possible to determine whether the positive effect was additive or synergistic.

Pesticide synergism has been defined as “the simultaneous action of two or more compounds in which the total response of an organism to the pesticide combination is greater than the sum of the individual components” (Nash, 1981). Hence, when fungicides interact synergistically, a high level of disease control is achieved with less than label rates of each individual fungicide. Usually, the best effect is achieved with combinations of fungicides with different modes of action (MOA), but synergy has also been demonstrated in combined use of products with similar mode of action (De Waard, 1996). Fungicide synergism has been demonstrated mostly in laboratory studies (Samoucha and Cohen, 1984; Gisi, 1996) but in some cases (Karaogladinis and Karadimos, 2006; Burpee and Latin, 2008) synergism has also been found in the field studies. Additionally, synergism of antifungal compounds other than fungicides (bicarbonates and refined petroleum distillate) has been demonstrated against rose powdery mildew and black spot (Horst et al., 1992).

SUMMARY

Disclosed and claimed is a combination comprising: (a) an extract derived from a plant, wherein said extract contains one or more anthraquinone derivatives which induce plant resistance to phytopathogens (also referred to as “plant pathogens”) and (b) one or more anti-phytopathogenic agents selected from the group consisting of: (i) a non-benzodiathiazole, non-Vitamin E, non-organophosphorus anti-microbial agent, which lacks or in other words does not contain non-elemental, non-wettable sulfur, (ii) a surfactant having fungicidal activity and (iii) a non-Bacillus, non-Pseudomonas, non-Brevabacillus, non-Lecanicillium, non-Ampelomyces, non-Phoma, non-Pseudozyma biological control agent (e.g., an agent derived from Streptomyces sp., Burkholderia sp., Trichoderma sp., Gliocladium sp. or a natural oil or oil-product having fungicidal and/or insecticidal activity).

In a specific embodiment, the combination comprises: (a) an extract derived from the family Polygonaceae and (b) a non-benzodiathiazole, non-Vitamin E, non-organophosphorus anti-fungal and/or antibacterial agent, which lacks or does not contain non-elemental or non-wettable sulfur.

In one specific embodiment, the combination comprises (a) an extract derived from the family Polygonaceae (e.g. Reynoutria sachalinensis) and (b) a single site fungicide and/or multi-site fungicide which may include but is not limited to myclobutanil, quinoxyfen, azoxystrobin, acibenzolar-S-methyl, mefenoxam, triflumizole, fludioxonil, propiconazole.

In another specific embodiment, the combination comprises (a) an extract derived from the family Polygonaceae (e.g. Reynoutria sachalinensis) and (b) a natural oil or oil-product having fungicidal and/or insecticidal activity.

In yet another particular embodiment, the combinations are compositions, particularly compositions for use in modulating phytopathogenic or fungal infection. The invention is further directed to the use of the extract and anti-phytopathogenic agents in formulating these compositions.

The invention is additionally directed to a synergistic combination for use in modulating phytopathogenic infection comprising (a) an extract derived from a plant, wherein said plant contains anthraquinone derivatives that induce plant resistance to phytopathogens and (b) a non-Vitamin E, non-organophosphorus antimicrobial agent (e.g., anti-fungal and/or antibacterial agent), which lacks or does not contain non-elemental or non-wettable sulfur. In a particular embodiment, the antimicrobial agent is a benzodiathiazole (e.g., acibenzolar-S-methyl), a triazole (e.g., propiconazole) or a strobilurin (e.g., azoxystrobin).

The above mentioned combinations may also be formulated into compositions.

The invention is further directed to a method for modulating phytopathogenic infection in a plant comprising applying to the plant and/or seeds thereof and/or substrate used for growing said plant an amount of the combinations of the present invention set forth above effective to modulate said phytopathogenic infection.

In a particular embodiment, the invention is directed to a method for modulating fungal and/or bacterial infection in a plant comprising applying to the plant and/or seeds thereof and/or substrate used for growing said plant an amount of the combinations of the present invention effective to modulate said fungal and/or bacterial infection.

The extract and said anti-phytopathogenic agents (e.g., anti-fungal and/or antibacterial agents) may be administered sequentially, concurrently or in combination intermittently. As defined herein “phytopathogenic infection” means infection of a plant by plant pathogenic bacteria, fungi, insects, nematodes and/or mollusks.

The invention is further directed to a method for decreasing the resistance of a phytopathogen (e.g., fungus and/or bacteria) to (i) a non-Vitamin E, non-organophosphorus anti-microbial agent, which lacked or in other words did not contain non-elemental or non-wettable sulfur, (ii) a surfactant having fungicidal activity and/or (iii) a non-Bacillus, non-Pseudomonas, non-Brevabacillus, non-Lecanicillium, non-Ampelomyces, non-Phoma, non-Pseudozyma biological control agent (e.g., an agent derived from Streptomyces sp., Burkholderia sp., Trichoderma sp., Gliocladium sp. or a natural oil or oil-based product having fungicidal and/or insecticidal activity) comprising applying to a plant in need thereof an amount of the combinations of the present invention effective to decrease the emergence of said resistance. In a particular embodiment, the invention is directed to a method for decreasing the resistance of a fungus and/or bacteria to a non-elemental or non-wettable, sulfur, non-benzodiathiazole, non-Vitamin E, non-organophosphorus anti-fungal and/or antibacterial agent. In yet another particular embodiment, the invention is directed to a method for decreasing resistance of a fungus and/or bacteria to a natural oil or oil-based product having fungicidal and/or insecticidal activity using the combination of the present invention. This may be accomplished by decreasing the frequency or rate of emergence. The resistance of a phytopathogen to the above-mentioned anti-pathogenic agents may be reduced by at least 50%.

The invention is further directed to the use of (a) an extract derived from a plant, wherein said extract contains anthraquinone derivatives which induce plant resistance to phytopathogens, and (b) one or more anti-phytopathogenic agents selected from the group consisting of: (i) a non-benzodiathiazole, non-Vitamin E, non-organophosphorus anti-microbial agent which lacks nonelemental, non-wettable sulfur, (ii) a surfactant having fungicidal activity and (iv) a non-Bacillus, non-Pseudomonas, non-Brevabacillus, non-Lecanicillium, non-Ampelomyces, non-Phoma, non-Pseudozyma biological control agent for the manufacture of a composition for modulating phytopathogenic infection as well as the use of (a) an extract derived from a plant, wherein said plant contains anthraquinone derivatives that induce plant resistance to phytopathogens and (b) a benzodiathiazole anti-microbial agent for the manufacture of a synergistic composition for modulating phytopathogenic infection.

The invention is further directed to a kit comprising (a) an extract derived from the family Polygonaceae and (b) one or more anti-phytopathogenic agents selected from the group consisting of: (i) a non-benzodiathiazole, non-Vitamin E, non-organophosphorus, anti-microbial agent, which lacks a non-elemental or non-wettable sulfur, (ii) a surfactant having fungicidal activity and (iii) a non-Bacillus, non-Pseudomonas, non-Brevabacillus, non-Lecanicillium, non-Ampelomyces, on-Phoma, non-Pseudozyma biological control agent. This kit may further comprise packaging instructions.

DETAILED DESCRIPTION OF SPECIFIC EMBODIMENTS

Where a range of values is provided, it is understood that each intervening value, to the tenth of the unit of the lower limit unless the context clearly dictates otherwise, between the upper and lower limit of that range and any other stated or intervening value in that stated range is encompassed within the invention. The upper and lower limits of these smaller ranges may independently be included in the smaller ranges is also encompassed within the invention, subject to any specifically excluded limit in the stated range. Where the stated range includes one or both of the limits, ranges excluding either both of those included limits are also included in the invention.

Unless defined otherwise, all technical and scientific terms used herein have the same meaning as commonly understood by one of ordinary skill in the art to which this invention belongs. Although any methods and materials similar or equivalent to those described herein can also be used in the practice or testing of the present invention, the preferred methods and materials are now described. Further, although this invention has been described with reference to specific embodiments, the details thereof are not to be construed as limiting, as it is obvious that one can use various equivalents, changes and modifications and still are within the scope of the present invention.

Various references are cited throughout this specification, each of which is incorporated herein by reference in its entirety.

It must be noted that as used herein and in the appended claims, the singular forms “a,” “and” and “the” include plural references unless the context clearly dictates otherwise. For example, “a fungus” also encompasses “fungi”.

As defined herein, the term “modulate” is used to mean to alter the amount of phytopathogenic infection or rate of spread of phytopathogenic infection.

Extracts

The plant extracts used in the combinations, compositions and methods of the present invention contain anthraquinone derivatives as biochemical agricultural products for use against plant pests, particularly plant phytopathogens such as plant pathogenic bacteria, fungi, insects, nematodes and/or as a molluscicide. “Contain” also encompasses extracts that produce said anthraquinone derivatives. In a particular embodiment, the anthraquinone derivative(s) of the present invention which is used in compositions and methods of the present invention is (are) the major active ingredients or one of the major active ingredients.

Anthraquinone derivatives include but are not limited to physcion, emodin, chrysophanol, ventiloquinone, emodin glycoside, chrysophanol glycoside, physcion glycoside, 3,4-dihydroxy-1-methoxy anthraquinone-2-corboxaldehyde, damnacanthal. These derivatives share a similar structure as follows:

Where R1, R2, R3, R4, R5, R6, R7 and R8 are hydrogen, hydroxyl, hydroxylalkyl, halogen, carboxyl, alkyl, alkyoxyl, alkenyl, alkenyloxyl, alkynyl, alkynyloxyl, heterocyclyl, aromatic, or aryl group, sugars such as glucose.

In a particular embodiment, the invention is directed to anthraquinone derivatives that are contained in extracts derived from plant families including but not limited to Polygonaceae, Rhamnaceae, Fabaceae, Asphodelaceae, and Rubiaceae so on. These compounds can be from any part of plants such as leaf, stem, bark, root and fruits. Plant materials can be wet and dry, but preferably dry plant materials. To meet the biochemical agricultural products, solvents and processes that are used in the extraction and purification must meet the requirements of National Organic Program (NOP) [http://www.ams.usda.gov/AMSv1.0/nop,].

In a more particular embodiment, the plant extract is derived from a member of the Polygonaceae family. As defined herein, “derived from” means directly isolated or obtained from a particular source or alternatively having identifying characteristics of a substance or organism isolated or obtained from a particular source. In a particular embodiment, extract in said combination contains at anthraquinone derivatives physcion and optionally emodin. Members of the Polygonaceae family include but are not limited to Acetosella, Antigonon, Aristocapsa, Bilderdykia, Brunnichia, Centrostegia, Chorizanthe, Coccoloba, Coccolobis, Coccolobo, Corculum, Dedeckera, Delopyrum, Dentoceras, Dodecahema, Emex, Eriogonum, Fafopyrum, Fagopyrum, Fallopia, Gilmania, Goodmania, Harfordia, Hollisteria, Koenigia, Lastarriaea, Mucronea, Muehlenbeckia, Nemacaulis, Oxyria, Oxytheca, Perscarioa, Persicaria, Pleuropterus, Podopterus, Polygonella, Polygonum, Pterostegia, Rheum, Rumex, Ruprechtia, Stenogonum, Systenotheca, Thysanella, Tovara, Tracaulon, Triplaris and even more particular embodiment, the extract may be derived from a Reynoutria (alternately referred to as Fallopia) sp. or Rheum species. In a most particular embodiment, the extract is derived from Reynoutria sachalinensis.

Anti-Phytopathogenic Agents

The formulated extract (such as products marketed under trade names REGALIA® and MILSANA®) can then be used in combination with other anti-phytopathogenic agents plant extracts, biopesticides, inorganic crop protectants (such as copper), surfactants (such as rhamnolipids; Gandhi et al., 2007) or natural oils such as paraffinic oil and tea tree oil possessing pesticidal properties or chemical fungicides or bactericides with either single site, multisite or unknown mode of action. As defined herein, an “anti-phytopathogenic agent” is an agent which modulates the growth of a plant pathogen on a plant or alternatively prevents infection of a plant by a plant pathogen. A plant pathogen includes but is not limited to a fungus, bacteria, virus, insects, nematodes and/or mollusca.

In a particular embodiment, the anti-phytopathogenic agent is a biopesticide alternatively referred to as a biocontrol agent. This biocontrol agent is in a more particular embodiment a non-Bacillus, non-Pseudomonas, non-Brevabacillus, non-Lecanicillium, non-Ampelomyces, non-Phoma, non-Pseudozyma biological control agent is an agent derived from Streptomyces sp., Burkholderia sp., Trichoderma sp., Gliocladium sp. Alternatively, the agent is a natural oil or oil-product having fungicidal and/or insecticidal activity (e.g., paraffinic oil, tea tree oil, lemongrass oil, clove oil, cinnamon oil, citrus oil, rosemary oil).

As noted above, the anti-phytopathogenic agent may be a single site anti-fungal agent which may include but is not limited to benzimidazole, a demethylation inhibitor (DMI) (e.g., imidazole, piperazine, pyrimidine, triazole), morpholine, hydroxypyrimidine, anilinopyrimidine, phosphorothiolate, quinone outside inhibitor, quinoline, dicarboximide, carboximide, phenylamide, anilinopyrimidine, phenylpyrrole, aromatic hydrocarbon, cinnamic acid, hydroxyanilide, antibiotic, polyoxin, acylamine, phthalimide, benzenoid (xylylalanine). In a more particular embodiment, the antifungal agent is a demethylation inhibitor selected from the group consisting of imidazole (e.g., triflumizole), piperazine, pyrimidine and triazole (e.g., bitertanol, myclobutanil, penconazole, propiconazole, triadimefon, bromuconazole, cyproconazole, diniconazole, fenbuconazole, hexaconazole, tebuconazole, tetraconazole, propiconazole). In a most particular embodiment, the antifungal agent is myclobutanil. In yet another particular embodiment, the antifungal agent is a quinone outside inhibitor (e.g., strobulurin). The strobulurin may include but is not limited to azoxystrobin, kresoxim-methoyl or trifloxystrobin. In yet another particular embodiment, the anti-fungal agent is a quinone, e.g., quinoxyfen (5,7-dichloro-4-quinolyl 4-fluorophenyl ether).

In yet a further embodiment, the antimicrobial agent is a multi-site non-inorganic, chemical fungicide selected from the group consisting of a nitrile (e.g., chloronitrile or fludioxonil), quinoxaline, sulphamide, phosphonate, phosphite, dithiocarbamate, chloralkylhios, phenylpyridin-amine, cyano-acetamide oxime.

In yet another embodiment, the anti-phytopathogenic agent is an anti-bacterial agent. This anti-bacterial agent includes but is not limited to carbamates, organophosphates, cyclodiene organochlorides, phenylpyrazoles, pyrethroids, pyrethrins, neonicotinoids, nitroguanadines, nicotine, Spinosyn, glycosides, juvenile hormone analogues and other insect growth regulators, pyridine azomethine, pyridine carboxamide, tetrazine, thiazolidinone, 2,4-diphenyloxzoline derivatives, organotin, pyrrole, buprofezin, hydramethylnon, naphtoquinon derivatives, pyridazinone, phenoxypyrazole, tetronic acid, carbazate, rotenone, organochlorine-diphenylaliphatics.

Uses

The said plant extract or formulated product can be used simultaneously with the other component or components in a tank mix or in a program (sequential application called rotation) with predetermined order and application interval during the growing season. When used in a combination with the above-mentioned pesticidal products, at concentration lower than recommended in the product label, the combined efficacy of the two or more products (one of which is the said plant extract) is in a preferred embodiment, higher than each individual component's effect added together. Hence, the pesticidal effect is enhanced by synergism between these two (or more) products, and the risk for the development of pesticide resistance among the plant pathogenic strains is reduced.

Target plants to be protected within the scope of the present invention comprise, for example, the following species of plants: cereals (wheat, barley, rye, oats, rice, sorghum and related crops), beet (sugar beet and fodder beet), pommes and soft fruit (apples, pears, plum, peaches, almonds, cherries, strawberries, raspberries and blackberries), leguminous plants (beans, lentils, peas and soybeans), oil plants (rape, mustard, poppy, olives, sunflowers, coconuts, castor oil plants, cocoa beans and ground nuts), cucurbits (cucumber, melons, pumpkins, eggplant), fiber plants (cotton, flax, hemp and jute), citrus fruit (oranges, lemon, grapefruits and mandarins), vegetables (spinach, lettuce, asparagus, cabbages, carrots, onions, tomatoes, potatoes and paprika), lauraceae (avocadoes, cinnamon and camphor) or plants such as maze, tobacco, nuts, coffee, sugar cane, tea, vines, hops, bananas and natural rubber plants, as well as ornamentals (composites), areas of grass or general low cover crops which counteract erosion or desiccation of the soil and are useful in cultures of trees and perennials (fruit plantations, hop plantations, maze fields, vineyards, etc.).

The preferred method of applying combinations of products in the present invention is a foliar application (spraying, atomizing, dusting, scattering or pouring) with or without a carrier. The number of applications and the rate of application depend on the risk of infestation by a pathogen. For example, the foliar pesticidal treatments with combinations and mixtures covered in this patent can be made once in every 7 to 14 days at 25 to 10,000-fold lower rates than recommended in the product label. Product mixtures and combinations targeted in the present invention may also be applied to seeds by impregnating the seeds either with a liquid formulation containing the active ingredient or coating them with a solid formulation. In special cases, further types of application are also possible. These include soil drench or selective treatment of plant stems or buds.

The mixtures of the present invention and, where appropriate, a solid or liquid adjuvant are prepared in known manner. For example, the mixtures may be prepared by homogeneously mixing and/or grinding the active ingredients with extenders such as solvents, solid carriers and, where appropriate, surface-active compounds (surfactants). The compositions may also contain further ingredients such as stabilizers, viscosity regulators, binders, adjuvants as well as fertilizers or other active ingredients in order to obtain special effects.

EXAMPLES

As will be set forth below, in satisfaction of the foregoing objects and advantages, examples of methods for increasing the efficacy of two or more products by using them at rates that produce synergistic or additive effects. The compositions and methods described here have been proven effective in reducing the disease incidence and severity in greenhouse-grown cucumbers (Cucumis sativus) but the concept can be used effectively for other plant varieties and species. The compositions and methods are particularly effective against cucumber powdery mildew but they can be applied to other fungal, bacterial, and viral plant diseases as well such as grey mold, leaf spots, bacterial wilt, scab, anthracnose, tobacco mosaic virus etc.

Materials and Methods

Powdery Mildew Examples I-V and X-XI

The studies were conducted in a green house. Experimental design of the studies for synergism followed the Burpee and Latin (2008). Powdery mildew, caused by Sphaerotheca fuliginea, was used for investigating the efficacy of the treatments.

Cucumber seeds cv. “SMR 58” (Irwin & Sons Ag Supply, Inc. Cheshire, Oreg.) were grown in plastic 4-inch pots with potting soil mix (Rod McLellan Company, Marysville, Ohio). The plants were treated at 2-true leaf stage. The compounds at various rates were sprayed with a 2-oz mist sprayer at 2 ml per plant at upper side and 1 ml at lower side of the leaves. The treated plants were left for 3-4 hours under florescent light to dry before inoculation.

A conidia suspension of Sphaerotheca fuliginea, the causal agent of powdery mildew disease on cucumber, was prepared by cutting diseases leaves of the cucumber plants that are served for conservation of inoculum. The suspension were adjusted to 2.0×10⁵ conidia per ml and applied with a 2-oz mist sprayer at 2 ml per plant on the upper side of the leaves. The inoculated plants were placed in a greenhouse and the treatments were arranged in randomized complete blocks with 4 to 6 replicates at 25° C. to 30° C.

The disease severity (percentage area covered with colonies) of the first leaves were rated according to James (1971). Disease severity and percentage control were analyzed with analysis of variance (ANOVA) and means of the treatments were compared with Fisher's Protected Least Difference (LSD) at p=0.05 level. Synergetic effect was calculated and analyzed with Limpel's formula (Limpel et al., 1962; Richer, 1987).

Lettuce Downy Mildew Examples VI-VII

Synergy between MBI-106 and acibenzolar-S-methyl or mefenoxam which control a specific class of pathogens Oomycetes was tested with lettuce downy mildew following Su et al. (2004).

To prepare inoculum of downy mildew, lettuce seeds were placed on 5-mm petri-dishes with about 20-30 seeds in each and watered with sterile water, then supplied with ½ strength of Hoagland's solution after germination. The petri dishes were placed at 20° C. growth chamber for 7-10 days. The spores of Bremia lactucae was inoculated on lettuce cotyledons and cultured for 7-10 days at 15° C. for sporulation to occur. Cotyledons with sporulation were cut off and placed in a falcon tube with sterile water. The cotyledons were vortexed for 15 seconds three times and filtered through a 100-uμm mesh to collect sporangia. The solution was adjusted to 0.5 to 1.0×10⁵ spores/ml for inoculation.

Four test plants were seeded in each 2-in pots and then placed at 20° C. for 7-10 days to grow cotyledons. Plants were ready for test when the first true leaf was emerging.

The lettuce plants were treated with the materials and left to dry or overnight. Then the plants were inoculated with sporangial solution. The treatments were arranged in a randomized complete block design with four replicates. The inoculated plants were placed in darkness in growth chamber for 48 hours and then incubated under 12-h light period at 15° C. Eight to ten days after inoculation, the cotyledons were rated for disease severity (percentage area covered with sporangiophores).

Seed Treatment Examples VIII-IX

The experiments described below were conducted with soybean but similar procedures are used with other crops such as cereals, corn, cotton, and potatoes.

The experiments were conducted in a greenhouse following the procedure developed by Hwang et al. (2006). The isolate of Rhizoctonia solani was grown on potato dextrose agar plates and cultured for 5 days for inoculating oat or wheat grain. One liter of grain was soaked overnight at room temperature (25° C.) and rinsed three times with tape water. The 8×12-in autoclave bags were filled with the grain up to ⅓ full were autoclaved at 121° C. for 15 min. The autoclaved grain then was then inoculated with 5 pieces of 1×1 cm plug of the 5-day culture of R. solani per bag and cultured for 5 days at room temperature (25° C.). The bags were left open in laminar flow hood to let the grain completely dry.

The blank seed sample of 10 g to be coated was placed in a flask. Coating agent SEPIRET® 1171-0 (Becker Underwood Ltd., Ames, Iowa) was put into the flasks together with the compound of interest, and the flask was shaken vigorously so that the seed picked up the compound. The procedure was repeated with fresh seed sample of cvs. “White Lion” (Kitazawa Seed Co., Oakland, Calif.) or “Viking 2265” (Johnny's Selected Seeds, Winslow, Me.) in the same flask for the treatments. After the seeds were coated, they were left to air dry before planting.

To prepare the soil, five hundred milliliters of the dried grains with inoculum were blended for 15 seconds three times and the powder was mixed with sterile sand at 1:1 (v/v) to dilute the inoculum. The sand mix was further used to prepare soil mix at various proportions 1:350 to 1:800 (inoculum:soil) for soybean to generate various disease levels in repeated tests.

The coated seeds were planted in the pots with infested soil. There were three replicates of each treatment which were arranged in a complete randomized block design and placed at 25 to 30° C. in a greenhouse.

After 10 to 20 days, depending on disease pressure and temperature, emergence of each treatment was rated and compared. Biomass was measured by weighing the above-ground portion which was measured for each replicate of the plant material.

Example I Synergistic Effect Between Formulated R. sachalinensis Extract and Myclobutanil (Test I)

MBI-106 (formulated R. sachalinensis extract marketed as REGALIA® SC by Marrone Bio Innovations, Inc., Davis, Calif.) diluted at 10-fold lower than label rates of 1500× and 2000× and myclobutanil (formulated as RALLY® 40W, Dow AgroSciences LLC, Indianapolis, Ind.) at concentrations of 0.25 ug/ml, 0.1 ug/ml, and 0.05 ug/ml (450 to 2.250-fold lower than recommended label rates) were applied alone or in tank mix.

Disease severity was significantly reduced in MBI-106 at 1500× and 2000× in combination with myclobutanil at 0.25 ug/ml than that when they were used alone (Table 1). Significant increase in control efficacy was found with the combination of MBI-106 2000× tank mixed with myclobutanil at rates of 0.25 ug/ml and 0.05 ug/ml (Table 2).

Example II Synergistic Effect Between R. sachalinensis Extract and Myclobutanil (Test II)

In a second test using MBI-106 (formulated as REGALIA® SC) and myclobutanil (formulated as RALLY® 40W), higher efficacy was found when MBI-106 at 2000× (10-fold lower than label rate) dilution in combination with myclobutanil at rates of 0.25, 0.1, and 0.05 ug/ml, and when MBI-106 at 1500× was tanked mixed with myclobutanil at 0.05 ug/ml (Table 3). Significant synergistic effect was displayed when MBI-106 diluted at 1500× and 2000× was combined with myclobutanil at the lowest rate of 0.05 ug/ml (Table 4).

Example III Synergistic Effect Between formulated R. sachalinensis Extract and Quinoxyfen

MBI-106 diluted at 1500× or 2000× was applied alone or in combination with quinoxyfen (formulated as QUINTEC®, Dow AgroSciences LLC, Indianapolis, Ind.) at 0.05 and 0.01 ug/ml (2,000 to 10.000-fold lower than label rates) either alone or in a tank mix. The results are shown in Tables 5 and 6. The most significant synergistic effect and enhanced disease control was found at R. sachalinensis product dilution of 2000× with quinoxyfen at 0.01 ug/mL. Quinoxyfen has a new multi-site mode of action affecting G-proteins in early cell signaling.

Example IV Synergistic Effect Between Formulated R. sachalinensis Extract and Azoxystrobin

MBI-106 diluted at 1500× or 2000× was applied alone or in combination with azoxystrobin (formulated as QUADRIS®, Syngenta Corporation, Wilmington, Del.) at a rate 0.25, 0.5, 1.0, 5.0, and 10 ug/mL (25 to 1020-fold lower than recommended label rates) either alone or in a tank mix.

The results are shown in Tables 7 and 8. Of all tested combinations, mixes with R. sachalinensis extract at 2000× dilution and azoxystrobin at either 5.0 or 0.5 ug/mL provided the greatest synergy, and the fungicidal efficacy was significantly greater than expected compared to the single-compound use data.

Example V Synergistic Effect Between Formulated R. sachalinensis Extract and Triflumizole

MBI-106 (formulated R. sachalinensis extract marketed as REGALIA® SC by Marrone Bio Innovations, Inc., Davis, Calif.) at 2500× dilution (10-fold lower than label rate) and triflumizole (formulated as PROCURE® 480SC, Chemtura Corporation, Middlebury, Conn.) at concentrations of 1.0 ug/ml, 0.5 ug/ml, and 0.25 ug/ml (150 to 600-fold lower than recommended label rates) were applied alone or in tank mix to.

Disease severity was significantly reduced (P<0.0001) in treatments sprayed with MBI-106 at 2500× dilution in combination with triflumizole compared with a treatment where MBI-106 was used alone (Table 9). Synergistic effect in efficacy was found at the combination of MBI-106 2500× tank mixed with triflumizole at rates of 1.0 ug/ml, 0.5 ug/ml, and 0.25 ug/ml (Table 10).

Example VI Synergistic Effect Between R. sachalinensis Extract and acibenzolar-S-methyl in Controlling Lettuce Downy Mildew

MBI-106 (formulated R. sachalinensis extract marketed as REGALIA® SC by Marrone Bio Innovations, Inc., Davis, Calif.) was used alone at 200× dilution or in combination with acibenzolar-S-methyl (formulated as ACTIGARD®, Syngenta Crop Protection, Inc., Greensboro, N.C.) at concentrations of 25 ug/ml to control lettuce downy mildew.

Disease severity was significantly reduced (p=0.0004) in MBI-106 at 200× dilution in combination with acibenzolar-S-methyl compared to treatments in which they were used alone (Table 11). There is a synergistic effect in efficacy in the tank mix of MBI-106 200× and acibenzolar-S-methyl (Table 12).

Example VII Synergistic Effect Between R. sachalinensis Extract and Mefenoxam in Controlling Lettuce Downy Mildew

To investigate the synergistic effect of Reynoutria and MBI-106, formulated product REGALIA® ME by Marrone Bio Innovations, Inc., Davis, Calif. was used at 400× dilution rate in combination with mefenoxam (formulated as RIDOMIL GOLD®, Syngenta Crop Protection, Inc., Greensboro, N.C.) at concentrations of 37.5 μg/ml, 75.0 μg/ml, and 150 μg/ml to control lettuce downy mildew.

Disease severity was significantly reduced (p<0.0001) in MBI-106 at 400× dilution in combination with mefenoxam compared to treatments in which they were used alone at each concentration (Table 13). Synergistic effect in efficacy of the tank mix of MBI-106 200× and mefenoxam was found in combinations of MBI-106 and each concentration of mefenoxam (Table 14).

Example VIII R. sachalinensis Extract as a Seed Treatment Agent and its Synergy with Azoxystrobin in Controlling Rhizoctonia solani

Reynoutria sachalinensis was extracted with ethanol at 5% (w/w) and used for seed coating at 0.2117 g/kg seed, either alone or in combination with azoxystrobin (QUADRIS®, Syngenta Crop Protection, Inc., Greensboro, N.C.) at 0.0298 g/kg seed to control Rhizoctonia solani on soybean. The emergence rate was higher in the inoculated seeds treated with MBI-106 compared to the inoculated untreated control, and when used in combination with azoxystrobin, the emergence rate was higher than when either product was used alone (Table 15). A synergistic effect was found when both materials were used in combination (Table 16).

Example IX R. sachalinensis Extract as a Seed Treatment Agent and Synergy with Fludioxonil in Controlling Rhizoctonia solani

The ethanol extract of R. sachalinensis was also used at the rates of 0.03175 g/kg seed and 0.635 g/kg seed for seed coating, either alone or in combination with fludioxonil (formulated as Scholar® by Syngenta Crop Protection, Inc., Greensboro, N.C.) to control Rhizoctonia solani on soybean. The emergence rates and biomass were higher in the MBI-106 treated seeds compared to the inoculated untreated control and also higher when used in combination with fludioxonil at the rate of 0.0596 g/kg seed (Table 17). Synergistic effect was found in the two rates of MBI-106 when used in combination with fludioxonil (Table 18).

Example X Synergistic Effect Between Formulated R. sachalinensis Extract and Propiconazole in Controlling Cucumber Powdery Mildew

MBI-106 (formulated R. sachalinensis extract marketed as REGALIA® ME by Marrone Bio Innovations, Inc., Davis, Calif.) at 2500× dilution and propiconazole (formulated as PROPIMAX® EC, Dow AgroSciences LLC, Indianapolis, Ind.) at concentrations of 1.0 ug/ml were applied alone or in tank mix.

Disease severity was significantly reduced (P<0.0001) in treatments sprayed with MBI-106 at 2500× dilution in combination with propiconazole (Table 19). There is a synergistic effect in control efficacy in the combination of MBI-106 2500× tank mixed with propiconazole (Table 20).

Example XI Synergistic Effect Between R. sachalinensis Extract and Quinoxifen (Test II) in Controlling Cucumber Powdery Mildew

MBI-106 (formulated R. sachalinensis extract marketed as REGALIA® SC by Marrone Bio Innovations, Inc., Davis, Calif.) was used alone at 2000× dilution or in combination with azoxystrobin at three concentration 0.5, 0.25, and 0.1 ug/ml to control cucumber powdery mildew.

The control efficacy in MBI-106 at 2000× dilution in combination with azoxystrobin treatments are higher that they are used alone (Table 21). Synergistic effect in control efficacy of the tank mix of MBI-106 2000× exists in combinations of MBI-106 and each concentration of azoxystrobin (Table 22).

Tables

TABLE 1 Disease severity and percentage control of MBI-106 and myclobutanil (RALLY ® 40W) when used alone or in tank mix.¹ Treatment Dilution/Rate Severity (%)^(z) Control (%) Untreated control N/A 98.3 a 0.0 e myclobutanil 0.25 ug/ml 16.7 cd 83.1 bc myclobutanil  0.1 ug/ml 95.0 a 3.2 e myclobutanil 0.05 ug/ml 95.8 a 2.5 e Reynoutria extract 1500× 15.8 cd 84.0 bc Reynoutria extract 2000× 35.8 b 63.5 d Reynoutria extract + 1500× 1.2 e 98.8 a myclobutanil 0.25 ug/ml Reynoutria extract + 2000× 0.2 e 99.8 a myclobutanil 0.25 ug/ml Reynoutria extract + 1500× 11.8 de 87.9 ab myclobutanil  0.1 ug/ml Reynoutria extract + 2000× 27.5 bc 72.2 dc myclobutanil  0.1 ug/ml Reynoutria extract + 1500× 17.5 cd 82.4 bc myclobutanil 0.05 ug/ml Reynoutria extract + 2000× 20.8 cd 79.0 bc myclobutanil 0.05 ug/ml P < 0.0001 P < 0.0001 ¹Data in Column 3 (Severity (%)) are means of six replicates. Means with the same letter in a column are not significantly different according to Fisher's Protected Least Significant Difference (LSD) at P = 0.05 level.

TABLE 2 Expected efficacy (Ee)² of each product combination, and the statistical significance of detected synergism between MBI-106 (REGALIA ®SC) and myclobutanil (RALLY ® 40W) Treatment Dilution/Rate Control (%) E_(e) ³ T-test Reynoutria extract + 1500× 98.8 97.3 n.s. myclobutanil 0.25 ug/ml Reynoutria extract + 2000× 99.8 93.8 *** myclobutanil 0.25 ug/ml Reynoutria extract + 1500× 87.9 84.5 n.s. myclobutanil  0.1 ug/ml Reynoutria extract + 2000× 72.2 64.7 n.s.⁴ myclobutanil  0.1 ug/ml Reynoutria extract + 1500× 82.4 84.4 n.s. myclobutanil 0.05 ug/ml Reynoutria extract + 2000× 79.0 64.4 *⁵ myclobutanil 0.05 ug/ml ²E_(e) is the Expected efficacy and is determined with the Limpel's formula E_(e) = X + Y − (XY)/100 (Limpel et al., 1962; Richer, 1987). ³Data are means of six replicates. Means with the same letter in a column are not significantly different according to Fisher's Protected Least Significant Difference (LSD) at P = 0.05 level. ⁴n.s.: Not significant ⁵* and *** Significant at P < 0.05 and 0.001 respectively.

TABLE 3 Disease severity and percentage control of MBI-106 (REGALIA ® SC) and myclobutanil (RALLY ® 40W) when used alone or in tank mix in a repeated test. Treatment Dilution/Rate Severity (%)^(z6) Control (%) Untreated control N/A 91.3 a 0.0 e myclobutanil 0.25 ug/ml 53.8 bcd 41.3 dc myclobutanil  0.1 ug/ml 80.0 ab 12.2 de myclobutanil 0.05 ug/ml 93.8 a −2.8 e Reynoutria extract 1500× 20.0 ef 77.9 ab Reynoutria extract 2000× 63.8 abc 29.8 cde Reynoutria extract + 1500× 46.3 cde 48.8 bc myclobutanil 0.25 ug/ml Reynoutria extract + 2000× 33.8 cdef 62.7 bc myclobutanil 0.25 ug/ml Reynoutria extract + 1500× 33.8 cdef 62.6 bc myclobutanil  0.1 ug/ml Reynoutria extract + 2000× 38.8 cde 57.3 bc myclobutanil  0.1 ug/ml Reynoutria extract + 1500× 1.8 f 98.1 a myclobutanil 0.05 ug/ml Reynoutria extract + 2000× 21.3 def 77.0 ab myclobutanil 0.05 ug/ml P < 0.0001 P < 0.0001 ⁶Data are means of four replicates. Means with the same letter in a column are not significantly different according to Fisher's Protected Least Significant Difference (LSD) at P = 0.05 level.

TABLE 4 Synergistic effect between MBI-106 (REGALIA ® SC) and myclobutanil (RALLY ® 40W) in a repeated test. Treatment Dilution/Rate Control (%) E_(e) ^(z) T test Reynoutria extract + 1500× myclobutanil 0.25 ug/ml 48.8 87.0 n.s. Reynoutria extract + 2000× myclobutanil 0.25 ug/ml 62.7 58.8 n.s. Reynoutria extract + 1500× myclobutanil  0.1 ug/ml 62.6 80.6 n.s. Reynoutria extract + 2000× myclobutanil  0.1 ug/ml 57.3 38.3 n.s. Reynoutria extract + 1500× myclobutanil 0.05 ug/ml 98.1 77.3 *** Reynoutria extract + 2000× myclobutanil 0.05 ug/ml 77.0 27.8 ** ^(z)E_(e) is the Expected efficacy and is determined with the Limpel's formula E_(e) = X + Y − (XY)/100 (Limpel et al., 1962; Richer, 1987). ** and *** Significant at P < 0.01 and 0.001 respectively. n.s.: Not significant

TABLE 5 Disease severity and percentage control of MBI-106 (formulated R. sachalinensis extract) and quinoxyfen (QUINTEC ®) when used alone or in tank mix. Treatment Dilution/Rate Severity (%) Control (%) Untreated control N/A 91.3 a 0 Reynoutria extract 1500× 20.0 c 77.93 Reynoutria extract 2000× 63.8 b 29.75 quinoxyfen 0.05 ug/ml 30.0 c 66.95 quinoxyfen 0.01 ug/ml 90.0 a 1.33 Reynoutria extract + 1500× quinoxyfen 0.05 ug/ml 25.0 c 72.65 Reynoutria extract + 2000× quinoxyfen 0.05 ug/ml 12.5 c 86.25 Reynoutria extract + 1500× quinoxyfen 0.01 ug/ml 22.5 c 75.28 Reynoutria extract + 2000× quinoxyfen 0.01 ug/ml 13.8 c 85.1 n = 4, LSD P < 0.0001 P < 0.0001 Data are means of four replicates. Means with the same letter in a column are not significantly different according to Fisher's Protected Least Significant Difference (LSD) at P = 0.05 level.

TABLE 6 Synergistic effect between MBI-106 (Reynoutria extract, REGALIA ® SC) and quinoxyfen (QUINTEC ®) Treatment Dilution/Rate Control (%) E_(e) T-test Reynoutria extract + 1500× 72.65 92.7 * quinoxyfen 0.05 ug/ml Reynoutria extract + 2000× 86.25 76.8 n.s. quinoxyfen 0.05 ug/ml Reynoutria extract + 1500× 75.28 78.2 n.s. quinoxyfen 0.01 ug/ml Reynoutria extract + 2000× 85.1 30.7 ** quinoxyfen 0.01 ug/ml ^(Z)E_(e) is the Expected efficacy and is determined with the Limpel's formula E_(e) = X + Y − (XY)/100 (Limpel et al., 1962; Richer, 1987). * and ** Significant at P < 0.05 and 0.01 respectively. n.s.: Not significant.

TABLE 7 Disease severity and percentage control of powdery mildew using MBI-106 (R. sachalinensis extract, REGALIA ® SC) and azoxystrobin (QUADRIS ®). Severity Control Treatment Dilution/Rate (%) (%) Untreated control N/A 92.5 a 0.0 h azoxystrobin 10.0 ug/ml  11.3 efg 87.6 abc azoxystrobin 5.0 ug/ml 5.3 fg 94.3 ab azoxystrobin 1.0 ug/ml 30.0 cdef 68.1 bcdef azoxystrobin 0.5 ug/ml 48.8 bc 48.0 fg azoxystrobin 0.25 ug/ml  45.0 bcd 51.8 efg Reynoutria extract 1500x 11.3 efg 88.0 abc Reynoutria extract 2000x 61.3 b 34.3 g Reynoutria extract 2500x 48.8 bc 47.0 fg Reynoutria extract + 1500x 3.0 fg 96.8 ab azoxystrobin 10.0 ug/ml  Reynoutria extract + 2000x 4.0 fg 95.6 ab azoxystrobin 10.0 ug/ml  Reynoutria extract + 2500x 1.8 fg 98.1 ab azoxystrobin 10.0 ug/ml  Reynoutria extract + 1500x 1.0 g 98.9 ab azoxystrobin 5.0 ug/ml Reynoutria extract + 2000x 0.8 g 99.2 a azoxystrobin 5.0 ug/ml Reynoutria extract + 2500x 2.0 fg 97.9 ab azoxystrobin 5.0 ug/ml Reynoutria extract + 1500x 11.3 efg 87.6 abc azoxystrobin 1.0 ug/ml Reynoutria extract + 2000x 12.5 efg 86.3 abcd azoxystrobin 1.0 ug/ml Reynoutria extract + 2500x 25.0 cdefg 73.4 abcdef azoxystrobin 1.0 ug/ml Reynoutria extract + 1500x 16.3 defg 82.2 abcde azoxystrobin 0.5 ug/ml Reynoutria extract + 2000x 11.3 efg 87.7 abc azoxystrobin 0.5 ug/ml Reynoutria extract + 2500x 43.8 bcd 52.1 efg azoxystrobin 0.5 ug/ml Reynoutria extract + 1500x 40.0 bcde 56.4 defg azoxystrobin 0.25 ug/ml  Reynoutria extract + 2000x 25.0 cdefg 73.0 abcdef azoxystrobin 0.25 ug/ml  Reynoutria extract + 2500x 36.3 bcde 60.5 cdefg azoxystrobin 0.25 ug/ml  N = 4 P < 0.0001 P < 0.0001

TABLE 8 Synergistic effect between MBI-106 and azoxystrobin. Only treatments with statistically significant synergistic effect are included. Treatment Rate/Dilution Control (%) E_(e) T-test Reynoutria extract + 2000× 95.6 91.9 * azoxystrobin 10.0 ug/ml Reynoutria extract + 2500× 98.1 93.4 * azoxystrobin 10.0 ug/ml Reynoutria extract + 2000× 99.2 96.3 ** azoxystrobin 5.0 ug/ml Reynoutria extract + 2000× 87.7 65.8 ** azoxystrobin 0.5 ug/ml

TABLE 9 Disease severity and percentage control of R. sachalinensis and triflumizole (PROCURE ® 480SC) when used alone or in tank mix. Treatment Dilution/Rate Severity (%) Control (%) Untreated control N/A 97.5 a 0.0 Reynoutria extract 2500× 23.8 b 75.6 triflumizole 1.0 ug/ml 77.5 a 20.5 triflumizole 0.5 ug/ml 86.3 a 11.5 triflumizole 0.25 ug/ml  95.0 a 2.6 Reynoutria extract + 2500× 6.3 b 93.6 triflumizole 1.0 ug/ml Reynoutria extract + 2500× 15.0 b 84.6 triflumizole 0.5 ug/ml Reynoutria extract + 2500× 11.5 b 88.2 triflumizole 0.25 ug/ml  Data in Column 3 (Severity (%)) are means of four replicates. Means with the same letter in a column are not significantly different according to Fisher's Protected Least Significant Difference (LSD) at P = 0.05 level.

TABLE 10 The expected efficacy (E_(e)) of each product combination, control efficacy (E), and the synergistic effect (E/E_(e) > 1.0) between MBI-106 (REGALIA ® SC) and triflumizole (PROCURE ® 480SC) Tank mix Dilution/Rate Control (%) E_(e) E/E_(e) Reynoutria extract + 2500× 93.6 80.6 1.2 triflumizole 1.0 ug/ml Reynoutria extract + 2500× 84.6 78.4 1.1 triflumizole 0.5 ug/ml Reynoutria extract + 2500× 88.2 76.2 1.2 triflumizole 0.25 ug/ml  E_(e) is the expected efficacy and is determined with the Limpel's formula E_(e) = X + Y − (XY)/100 (Limpel et al., 1962; Richer, 1987).

TABLE 11 Disease severity and percentage control of MBI- 106 (REGALIA ® SC) and acibenzolar-S- methyl (ACTIGARD ®) when used alone or in tank mix. Treatment Dilution/Rate Severity (%) Control (%) Untreated control N/A 90.0 a 0.0 acibenzolar-S-methyl 25 ug/ml 68.9 ab 23.4 Reynoutria extract 200× 57.0 b 36.6 Reynoutria extract + 200× 14.2 c 84.2 acibenzolar-S-methyl 25 ug/ml

TABLE 12 The expected efficacy (E_(e)) of each product combination, control efficacy (E), and the synergistic effect (E/E_(e) > 1.0) between MBI-106 (REGALIA ® SC) and acibenzolar-S-methyl (ACTIGARD ®). Tank mix Control (%) E_(e) E/E_(e) Reynoutria extract + 84.2 51.5 1.6 acibenzolar-S-methyl

TABLE 13 Disease severity and percentage control of MBI-106 (REGALIA ® ME) and mefenoxam(RIDOMIL GOLD ® SL) Treatment Dilution/Rate Severity (%) Control (%) Untreated control N/A 87.0 ab 0.0 mefenoxam 150 ug/ml 44.8 de 48.5 mefenoxam  75 ug/ml 54.2 cd 37.7 mefenoxam 37.5 ug/ml  89.3 a −2.6 Reynoutria extract 400× 68.0 bc 21.8 Reynoutria extract + 400× 14.5 f 83.3 mefenoxam 150 ug/ml Reynoutria extract + 400× 28.6 ef 67.1 mefenoxam  75 ug/ml Reynoutria extract + 400× 59.2 cd 32.0 mefenoxam 37.5 ug/ml 

TABLE 14 The expected efficacy (E_(e)) of each product combination, actual control efficacy (E), and detected synergism (E/E_(e) > 1.0) between MBI-106 (REGALIA ® ME) and mefenoxam (RIDOMIL GOLD ® SL). Tank mix Dilution/Rate Control (%) E_(e) E/E_(e) Reynoutria extract + 400× 83.3 59.7 1.4 mefenoxam 150 ug/ml Reynoutria extract + 400× 67.1 51.3 1.3 mefenoxam  75 ug/ml Reynoutria extract + 400× 32.0 19.7 1.6 mefenoxam 37.5 ug/ml 

TABLE 15 Emergence of soybean seedling and control of damping off by MBI- 106 (ethanol extract) and azoxystrobin (QUADRIS ®). Treatment Rate Emergence (%) Control (%) Non-inoculated control N/A 90.1 a N/A Inoculated control N/A 4.9 c 0.0 Inoculated Reynoutria 0.02117 g/kg  11.1 c 6.2 extract Inoculated Reynoutria 0.02117 g/kg  92.6 a 87.7 extract + azoxystrobin 0.0298 g/kg Inoculated azoxystrobin 0.0298 g/kg 86.4 a 81.5

TABLE 16 The expected efficacy (E_(e)) of each product combination, actual control efficacy (E), and detected synergism (E/E_(e) > 1.0) between MBI-106 (ethanol extract) and azoxystrobin (QUADRIS ®). Tank mix Rate Control (%) E_(e) E/E_(e) Reynoutria extract + 0.02117 g/kg 87.7 82.6 1.1 azoxystrobin  0.0298 g/kg

TABLE 17 Emergence of soybean seedlings and control of damping off by MBI-106 (Reynoutria ethanol extract) and fludioxonil (SCHOLAR ®). Emergence Bio mass Treatment Rate (%) (g) Control (%) Inoculated control N/A 7.4 c 0.8 c 0.0 Inoculated Reynoutria extract 0.635 g/kg 9.9 c 1.4 c 2.5 Inoculated Reynoutria extract 0.03175 g/kg 16.0 c 2.9 c 8.6 Inoculated Reynoutria extract + 0.635 g/kg 61.8 a 17.0 a 54.4 fludioxonil 0.0596 g ai/kg Inoculated Reynoutria extract + 0.03175 g/kg 50.6 a 12.5 b 43.2 fludioxonil 0.0596 g ai/kg Inoculated fludioxonil 0.0596 g ai/kg 35.8 b 8.7 b 28.4

TABLE 18 The expected efficacy (E_(e)) of each product combination, actual control efficacy (E), and detected synergism (E/E_(e) > 1.0) between MBI-106 (ethanol extract) and fludioxonil (SCHOLAR ®). Tank mix Rate Control (%) E_(e) E/E_(e) Inoculated Reynoutria 0.635 g/kg 54.4 30.2 1.8 extract + fludioxonil 0.0596 g ai/kg Inoculated Reynoutria 0.03175 g/kg 43.2 34.6 1.2 extract + fludioxonil 0.0596 g ai/kg

TABLE 19 Disease severity and percentage control of R. sachalinensis and propiconazole (PROPIMAX ®) when used alone or in tank mix in controlling cucumber powdery mildew. Treatment Dilution/Rate Severity (%) Control (%) Untreated control N/A 98.8 a 0.0 propiconazole 1.0 ug/ml 97.5 a 1.3 Reynoutria extract 2500× 61.3 b 38.0 Reynoutria + 2500× 51.3 c 48.1 propiconazole 1.0 ug/ml

TABLE 20 The expected efficacy (E_(e)) of each product combination, control efficacy (E), and the synergistic effect (E/E_(e) > 1.0) between MBI-106 (REGALIA ® ME) and propiconazole (PROPIMAX ®). Tank mix Dilution/Rate control (%) E^(e) E/e_(e) Reynoutria extract + 2500× 48.1 38.8 1.2 propiconazole 1.0 ug/ml

TABLE 21 Disease severity and percentage control of R. sachalinensis and azoxystrobin (QUADRIS ®) when used alone or in tank mix in controlling cucumber powdery mildew. Treatment Dilution/Rate Severity % Control (%) Untreated control N/A 80.0 a 13.5 azoxystrobin 0.5 ug/ml 35.0 cd 62.2 azoxystrobin 0.25 ug/ml  80.0 a 13.5 azoxystrobin 0.1 ug/ml 72.5 abc 21.6 Reynoutria extract 2000× 75.0 ab 18.9 Reynoutria extract + 2000× 11.3 d 87.8 azoxystrobin 0.5 ug/ml Reynoutria extract + 2000× 41.3 abcd 55.4 azoxystrobin 0.25 ug/ml  Reynoutria extract + 2000× 36.5 bcd 60.5 azoxystrobin 0.1 ug/ml

TABLE 22 The expected efficacy (E_(e)) of each product combination, control efficacy (E), and the synergistic effect (E/E_(e) > 1.0) between MBI-106 (Regalia ® SC) and azoxystrobin (Quadris ®) (Test II). Tank mix Dilution/Rate Control (%) E_(e) E/E_(e) Reynoutria extract + 2000× 87.8 69.3 1.3 azoxystrobin 0.5 ug/ml Reynoutria extract + 2000× 55.4 29.9 1.9 azoxystrobin 0.25 ug/ml  Reynoutria extract + 2000× 60.5 36.4 1.7 azoxystrobin 0.1 ug/ml Literature Cited:

-   Bardin, M., J. Fargues, et al. (2008). “Compatibility between     biopesticides used to control grey mold, powdery mildew and whitefly     on tomato.” Biological Control 46: 476-483. -   Bartlett, D. W., J. M. Clough, et al. (2002). “649-662.” Pest     Management Science 58: 649-662. -   Belanger, R. R. and M. Benyagoub (1997). “Challenges and prospoects     for integrated control of powdery mildews in the greenhouse.”     Canadian Journal of Plant Pathology 19: 310-314. -   Bokshi, A. I., J. Jobling, et al. (2008). “A single application of     Milsana followed by Bion assists in the control of powdery mildew in     cucumber and helps overcome yield losses.” Journal of Horticultural     Science and Biotechnology 83: 701-706. -   Braun, U., T. A. Cook, et al. (2002). The taxonomy of the powdery     mildew fungi. The powdery mildews: a comprehensive treatise. R. R.     Belanger, W. R. Bushnell, A. J. Dik and T. L. W. Carver. St. Paul,     Minn., APS Press: 13-55. -   Burpee, L. and R. Latin (2008). “Reassessment of fungicide synergism     for control of dollar spot.” Plant Disease 92: 601-606. -   Daayf, F., A. Schmitt, et al. (1995). “The effects of plant extracts     of Reynoutria sachalinensis on powdery mildew development and leaf     physiology of long English cucumber.” Plant Disease 79: 577-580. -   De Waard, M. A. (1996). “Synergism and antagonism in fungicide     mixtures containing sterol demethylation inhibitors.” Phytopathology     86: 1280-1283. -   Durrant, W. E. and X. Dong (2004). “Systemic acquired resistance.”     Annual Review in Phytopathology 42: 185-209. -   Fraaije, B., J. A. Lucas, et al. (2003). QoI resistance development     in populations of cereal pathogens in the UK. BCPC Internatrional     Congress—Crop Science and Technology, Alton, Hants, UK, pp. 689-694. -   Gandhi, N. R., V. P. Skebba, et al. (2007). Antimycotic rhamnolipid     compositions and related methods of use, US patent application     number 20070191292. USPTO. USA: 27 p. -   Gisi, U. (1996). “Synergistic interactions of fungicides in     mixtures” Phytopathology 86: 1273-1279. -   Hafez, M. B., A. Schmitt, et al. (1999). “The side-effects of plant     extracts and metabolites of Reynoutria sachalinensis (F. Schmidt)     Nakai and conventional fungicides on the beneficial organism     Trichogramma cacoeciae Marchal (Hym., Trichogrammatidae).” Journal     of Applied Entomology 123: 363-368. -   Holb, I. J. and G. Schnabel (2008). “The benefits of combining     elemental sulfur with a DMI fungicide to control Monilinia     fructicola isolates resistant to propiconazole.” Pest Management     Science 64: 156-164. -   Horst, R. K., S. O. Kawamoto, et al. (1992). “Effect of sodium     bicarbonate and oils on the control of powdery mildew and black spot     on roses.” Plant Disease 76: 247-251. -   Hwang, S. F., H. Wang, et al. (2006). “Effect of seed treatment and     root pathogens on seedling establishment and yield of alfalfa,     birdfoot trefoil and sweetclover.” Plant Pathology Journal     5:322-328. -   James, W. C. (1971). A manual assessment keys for plant diseases.     St. Paul, Minn., American Phytopathological Society. -   Karaoglanidis, G. S. and D. A. Karadimos (2006). “Efficacy of     strobilurins and mixtures with DM fungicides in controlling powdery     mildew in field-grown sugar beet.” Crop Protection 25: 977-983. -   Konstantinidou-Doltsinis, S., E. Markellou, et al. (2007). “Control     of powdery mildew of grape in Greece using Sporodex L and Milsana.”     Journal of Plant Diseases and Protection 114: 256-262. -   Limpel, L. E., P. H. Schuldt, et al. (1962). N.E. Weed Control     Conference. -   May, R. M. (1985). “Evolution of pesticide resistance.” Nature 315:     12-13. -   McGrath, M. T. (2001). “Fungicide resistance in cucurbit powdery     mildew: Experiences and challenges.” Plant Disease 85: 236-245. -   Reuveni, M. (2001). “Improved control of powdery mildew     (Sphaerotheca pannosa) of nectarines in Israel using strobilurin and     polyoxin B fungicides; mixtures with sulfur; and early bloom     applications.” Crop Protection 20: 663-668. -   Richer, D. (1987). “Synergism—a patent view.” Pesticide Science 19:     309-315. -   Ross, A. F. (1961). “Systemic acquired resistance induced by     localized virus infections in plants” Virology 14: 340-358. -   Samoucha, Y. and Y. Cohen (1984). “Synergy between metalaxyl and     macozeb in controlling downy mildew in cucumbers.” Phytopathology     74: 1434-1437. -   Schmitt, A. (2002). “Induced responses by plant extracts from     Reynoutria sachalinensis: a case study.” Bull. IOBC/WPRS 25: 83-89. -   Schmitt, A., S. Kunz, et al. (2002). Use of Reynoutria sachalinensis     plant extracts, clay preparations and Brevibacillus brevis against     fungal diseases of grape berries. Fordergemeinschaft Okologisher     Obstbau e.V. (FOKO) and der Staatlichen Lehr-und Versuchsanstalt fur     Wein-und Obstbau (LvWO) Weinsberg. 10th International conference on     cultication technique and phytopathological problems in organic     fruit-growing and viticulture; presentations at the meeting from     04-07.02.2002 Weinsberg, Germany, pp. 146-151. -   Schmitt, A. and B. Seddon (2005). Biocontrol of plant pathogens with     microbial BCAs and plant extracts—advantages and disadvantages of     single and combined use. Modern fungicides and antifungal     compounds IV. Proceedings of the 14th International Reinhardsbrunn     Symposium 2004, BCPC, Atlon, UK, pp. 205-225. -   Schnabel, G., B. K. Bryson, et al. (2004). “Reduced sensitivity in     Monilinia fructicola to propiconazole in Georgia and implications     for disease management” Plant Disease 88: 1000-1004. -   Su, H., A. H. C. van Bruggen, et al. (2004). “Sporulation of Bremia     lactucae affected by temperature, relative humidity, and wind in     controlled conditions”. Phytopathology 94:396-401 -   Tuttle McGrath, M. (2003). “Occurrence of strobilurin resistance and     impact on managing powdery mildew on cucurbits.” Cornell University;     Vegetable MD Online Retrieved Jul. 19, 2009, 2009, from     http://vegetableindottline.ppath.cornell.edu/NewsArticles/Cuc_Strob.htm. -   Tuttle McGrath, M. (2006). “Guidelines for managing cucurbit powdery     mildew in 2006.” Cornell University, Vegetable MD Online Retrieved     Jul. 19, 2009, 2009, from     http://vegetablemonlime.ppath.cornell.edu/NewsArticles/Cuc_PM_(—)2006.html. -   Van den Bosch, F. and C. A. Gilligan (2008). “Models of fungicide     resistance dynamics.” Annual Review in Phytopathology 46: 123-147. -   Vechet, L., L. Burketova, et al. (2009). “A comparative study of the     efficiency of several sources of induced resistance to powdery     mildew (Blumeria graminis f. sp. tritici) in wheat under field     conditions.” Crop Protection 28: 151-154. -   Walters, D., D. Walsh, et al. (2005). “Induced resistance for plant     disease control: maximizing the efficacy of resistance elicitors.”     Phytopathology 85: 1368-1373. -   Wurms, K., C. Labbe, et al. (1999). “Effects of Milsana and     Benzothiadiazole on the ultrastructure of powdery mildew haustoria     in cucumber.” Phytopathology 89: 728-736. -   Wyenandt, C. A., M. T. McGrath, et al. (2009). “Fungicide resistance     management guidelines for cucurbit downy and powdery mildew control     in the mid-Atlantic and Northeast regions of the US.” Phytopathology     99 (2009 APS Annual Meeting Abstracts of Presentations): S144-S144. 

What is claimed is:
 1. A synergistic combination for use in modulation of phytopathogenic infection comprising (a) an extract derived from a Reynoutria sp. plant, wherein said extract comprises one or more anthraquinone derivatives that induce plant resistance to phytopathogens, wherein said derivative (i) has the structure

wherein R1, R2, R3, R4, R5, R6, R7 and R8 are hydrogen, hydroxyl, hydroxylalkyl, halogen, carboxyl, alkyl or sugar and (b) at least one chemical pesticide selected from the group consisting of a single site anti-fungal agent and a multi-site non-inorganic, chemical fungicide wherein the amounts of Reynoutria extract and at least one chemical pesticide in said combination provide for synergism of modulation of phytopathogenic infection, wherein the synergism is measured by determining E/E_(e) and E/E_(e) is at least 1.2.
 2. The combination according to claim 1, wherein said chemical pesticide is a single site anti-fungal agent.
 3. The combination according to claim 1, wherein said single site anti-fungal agent is a demethylation inhibitor.
 4. The combination according to claim 1, wherein the demethylation inhibitor is selected from the group consisting of imidazole, piperazine, pyrimidine, and triazole.
 5. The combination according to claim 1, wherein said single site anti-fungal agent is a quinone outside inhibitor.
 6. The combination according to claim 5, wherein said quinone outside inhibitor is a strobilurin, wherein said strobilurin is azoxystrobin, kresoxim-methoyl or trifloxystrobin.
 7. The combination according to claim 1, wherein said combination is a composition.
 8. The synergistic combination of claim 1, wherein said E/E_(e) is at least 1.3.
 9. The combination according to claim 3, wherein the demethylation inhibitor is triflumizole.
 10. The combination according to claim 3, wherein the demethylation inhibitor is myclobutanil.
 11. The combination according to claim 3, wherein the demethylation inhibitor is propiconazole.
 12. The combination according to claim 1, wherein the chemical pesticide is mefenoxam.
 13. The combination according to claim 1, wherein the chemical pesticide is fludioxonil.
 14. The combination according to claim 1, wherein the chemical pesticide is quinoxyfen.
 15. A method for modulating phytopathogenic infection in a plant comprising applying to the plant and/or seeds thereof and/or substrate used for growing said plant an amount of the combination of claim 1 effective to modulate said phytopathogenic infection.
 16. The method according to claim 15, wherein the chemical pesticide is a single site anti-fungal agent.
 17. The method according to claim 16, wherein said single site anti- fungal agent is a demethylation inhibitor.
 18. The method according to claim 17, wherein the demethylation inhibitor is selected from imidazole, piperazine, pyrimidine, and triazole.
 19. The method according to claim 16, wherein the single site anti-fungal agent is a quinone outside inhibitor.
 20. The method according to claim 19, wherein the quinone outside inhibitor is a strobilurin.
 21. The method according to claim 20, wherein the strobilurin is azoxytrobin, kresoxim-methoyl, or trifloxystrobin.
 22. The method according to claim 17, wherein the demethylation inhibitor is triflumizole.
 23. The method according to claim 17, wherein the demethylation inhibitor is myclobutanil.
 24. The method according to claim 17, wherein the demethylation inhibitor is propiconazole.
 25. The method according to claim 15, wherein the chemical pesticide is mefenoxam.
 26. The method according to claim 15, wherein the chemical pesticide is fludioxonil.
 27. The method according to claim 15, wherein the chemical pesticide is quinoxyfen. 